The French HCQ Report
-
ABSTRACT
Background
In a recent survey, most physicians worldwide considered that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and azithromycin (AZ) are the two most effective drugs among available molecules against COVID-19. Nevertheless, to date, one preliminary clinical trial only has demonstrated its efficacy on the viral load. Additionally, a clinical study including 80 patients was published, and in vitro efficiency of this association was demonstrated.
Methods
The study was performed at IHU Méditerranée Infection, Marseille, France. A cohort of 1061 COVID-19 patients, treated for at least 3 days with the HCQ-AZ combination and a follow-up of at least 9 days was investigated. Endpoints were death, worsening and viral shedding persistence.
Findings
From March 3 to April 9 , 2020, 59,655 specimens from 38,617 patients were tested for COVID-19 by PCR. Of the 3,165 positive patients placed in the care of our institute, 1061 previously unpublished patients met our inclusion criteria. Their mean age was 43.6 years old and 492 were male (46.4%). No cardiac toxicity was observed. A good clinical outcome and virological cure was obtained in 973 patients within 10 days (91.7%). Prolonged viral carriage at completion of treatment was observed in 47 patients (4.4%) and was associated to a higher viral load at diagnosis (p < 10-2) but viral culture was negative at day 10 and all but one were PCR-cleared at day 15. A poor outcome was observed for 46 patients (4.3%); 10 were transferred to intensive care units, 5 patients died (0.47%) (74-95 years old) and 31 required 10 days of hospitalization or more. Among this group, 25 patients are now cured and 16 are still hospitalized (98% of patients cured so far). Poor clinical outcome was significantly associated to older age (OR 1.11), initial higher severity (OR 10.05) and low hydroxychloroquine serum concentration. In addition, both poor clinical and virological outcomes were associated to the use of selective beta-blocking agents and angiotensin II receptor blockers (P<0.05). Mortality was significantly lower in patients who had received > 3 days of HCQ-AZ than in patients treated with other regimens both at IHU and in all Marseille public hospitals (p< 10-2).
Interpretation
The HCQ-AZ combination, when started immediately after diagnosis, is a safe and efficient treatment for COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients. It avoids worsening and clears virus persistence and contagiosity in most cases. -
If Trump managed to read that out loud in one go I for one would be fucking amazed
-
If Trump managed to read that out loud in one go I for one would be fucking amazed
@Doctor-Phibes said in The French HCQ Report:
If Trump managed to read that out loud in one go I for one would be fucking amazed
Hell, if Trump quoted it from memory, you'd still find fault with it...
-
Is HCQ more dangerous and less effective than a vent?
-
@Loki said in The French HCQ Report:
Is HCQ more dangerous and less effective than a vent?
Being on a ventilator has a 50-75% mortality. It's not that the ventilator causes this, of course. I doubt that HCQ has that kind of problem.
Remember, the ventilator is not therapeutic. It is only a stopgap until you get better (or die).
-
@Loki said in The French HCQ Report:
Is HCQ more dangerous and less effective than a vent?
"No cardiac toxicity was observed." " mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients."
Looks game-changing to me.
-
@Loki said in The French HCQ Report:
Is HCQ more dangerous and less effective than a vent?
"No cardiac toxicity was observed." " mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients."
Looks game-changing to me.
@LuFins-Dad said in The French HCQ Report:
@Loki said in The French HCQ Report:
Is HCQ more dangerous and less effective than a vent?
"No cardiac toxicity was observed." " mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients."
Looks game-changing to me.
I know.
But, the old saw applies, "If it looks too good to be true..."
-
@LuFins-Dad said in The French HCQ Report:
@Loki said in The French HCQ Report:
Is HCQ more dangerous and less effective than a vent?
"No cardiac toxicity was observed." " mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients."
Looks game-changing to me.
I know.
But, the old saw applies, "If it looks too good to be true..."
@George-K said in The French HCQ Report:
But, the old saw applies, "If it looks too good to be true..."
A malaria drug widely touted by President Donald Trump for treating the new coronavirus showed no benefit in a large analysis of its use in U.S. veterans hospitals. There were more deaths among those given hydroxychloroquine versus standard care, researchers reported.
The nationwide study was not a rigorous experiment. But with 368 patients, it’s the largest look so far of hydroxychloroquine with or without the antibiotic azithromycin for COVID-19, which has killed more than 171,000 people as of Tuesday.
The study was posted on an online site for researchers and has has not been reviewed by other scientists. Grants from the National Institutes of Health and the University of Virginia paid for the work.
Researchers analyzed medical records of 368 male veterans hospitalized with confirmed coronavirus infection at Veterans Health Administration medical centers who died or were discharged by April 11.
About 28% who were given hydroxychloroquine plus usual care died, versus 11% of those getting routine care alone. About 22% of those getting the drug plus azithromycin died too, but the difference between that group and usual care was not considered large enough to rule out other factors that could have affected survival.
Hydroxychloroquine made no difference in the need for a breathing machine, either.
Researchers did not track side effects, but noted a hint that hydroxychloroquine might have damaged other organs. The drug has long been known to have potentially serious side effects, including altering the heartbeat in a way that could lead to sudden death.
-
Watch, here it comes:
"But over here, we have this reeeeely expensive pill that shows promise."
